Update Ad Set

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already cover readOnly=false, idempotent=true, and destructive=false, so the description does not need to restate them. It adds a useful return note ('Returns: Updated ad set details') because no output schema exists, but it does not disclose partial-update behavior, permissions, or side effects beyond that.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with a clear purpose sentence and ends with a useful return note. The long Args block is structured but largely duplicative of the schema, making the description longer than necessary while still remaining scannable.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The schema and annotations cover most parameter and safety details for this complex 15-parameter tool. The description adds a return note but does not clarify whether unspecified optional fields are left unchanged or reset, which is an important behavior for an update operation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the Args list mostly duplicates information already present in the input schema. It also omits iosAppId and googlePlayId, though the schema documents those. No additional semantic meaning is added beyond what the schema provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action ('Update') on a clear resource ('an existing ad set's configuration'), which distinguishes it from create_ad_set and update_ad_set_status. It does not explicitly name sibling tools, so it stops short of a full 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'existing ad set's configuration' implies when to use the tool: to modify configuration on an already-created ad set rather than to create or status-update. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or which alternatives to prefer.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.